Democrats clamoring for House Republicans to approve a Senate-passed (and White House-supported) extension of the payroll tax holiday got some bad news today. Though the House has already passed its own legislation to extend the existing 2 percent payroll tax cut through the end of next year, the Senate could only agree on a mere two-month extension. According to a group of payroll tax experts, such a short-term measure would be difficult to implement. ABC’s Jake Tapper reports:
Officials from the policy-neutral National Payroll Reporting Consortium, Inc. have expressed concern to members of Congress that the two-month payroll tax holiday passed by the Senate and supported by President Obama cannot be implemented properly.
Pete Isberg, president of the NPRC today wrote to the key leaders of the relevant committees of the House and Senate, telling them that “insufficient lead time” to implement the complicated change mandated by the legislation means the two-month payroll tax holiday “could create substantial problems, confusion and costs affecting a significant percentage of U.S. employers and employees.”
Here is a copy of the letter. The NPRC is a non-profit trade organization that does not take sides when it comes to policy:
“We’re neutral and we’d be happy to do the work,” Isberg told ABC News.
“The concern is really for those who don’t use a payroll service provider,” he said. Americans will have different outcomes, he said, causing confusion “because they’ll have different outcomes. Some will have it done on time, some won’t, some will have adjustment notices later in the year.”
House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) predicted today that House Republicans would reject the Senate plan, citing concerns over the length of the extension. “No more kicking the can down the road,” he said. “It’s time to stop the nonsense.” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) said the House would remain in session until an agreement can be reached on a year-long extension of the payroll tax holiday that is fully paid for. The Senate has already adjourned for the year.
UPDATE: Another group, the National Association of Wholesale-Distributors, writes Congressional leaders to “concur with the conclusion of the NPRC.”
“A two-month extension of the current reduced payroll tax rate,with the implicit rise in that rate in the first quarter of 2011, would exacerbate and escalate the uncertaintyabout fiscal policies that has inhibited business activity and slowed economic recovery and job creationfor the last several years,” the letter states.
"Unworkable" Yes! "It's time to stop the nonsense." Yes!
Perhaps the Grand Old Party is finally finding its voice.
(Captcha: labour of love - which should be the motto for all conservative activists in 2012).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUPDATE II: GOP Sens. Scott Brown (Mass.), Richard Lugar (Ind.) and Dean Heller (Nev.) have each called on the House to passed the Senate bill.
Three guys who should be primaried in 2012, but will likely win an NRO endorsement in the coming month. Scott Brown must love the blue state immunity; makes for a good career.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTranslation: Even though we're dedicated public servants, we'd rather not interrupt our vacations just because we didn't finish our work.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf Boehner wants to "stop the nonsense", why did he tie legislation for the payroll tax cut to other issues? How about an up or down vote on the payroll tax cut?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd the Senate bill has unrelated doc fix and jobless benefits stuff in it. Are some unrelated items okay and others not?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYeah. The difference between controversial items requiring more time to negotiate versus much less controversial items that can be agreed to rapidly.
Keep in mind that it is Republicans who have insisted on going forward with more complicated bills.
Why not have a clean vote on payroll tax cuts for the middle class? That would be the best alternative. In the absence of that, agree to the less controversial items now and create more time to negotiate on the more controversial items.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf Reid had wanted to have a clean vote on the payroll tax he could have done so.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou don't understand. Reid had no choice but to lard up his bill with unnecessary issues because the Republicans refused to negotiate with him.
No matter what happens, it's always the fault of the Republicans.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe pipeline issue is much less complicated than the issues in the Senate bill.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI called my Dem senator and raised Hell, I encourage everyone to do the same.
If the House is going to go out on this limb, we need to support them. I told my Dem senator's office that this is the same Leader Reid who jammed through Obamacare on Christmas Eve 2009 in the midst of a blizzard, and now he cannot be bothered to go to conference. The nerve.
Call them all at 202-224-3121 and support the House GOP.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThank god for wonderful and stalwart conservative senators like Brown, Lugar and Heller. They aren't competent enough to do their job but want to make sure that things work for Dems.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLugar is one of the intellects of the Senate-ever see a spark of brain during an interview. Brown-he will lose in Massachusetts because the idiots in that State will elect a real liberal, not one with a "R" by his name.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRemember all the wailing that the House had better not pass something and then go on vacation, because Harry Reid would play tricks to force them to return? Let's see ... the Senate passed something and immediately went on vacation, and now THEY are whining that Boehner is being a grinch??? Call me unsympathetic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe story I am hearing is that Boehner initially approved negotiations between Reid and McConnell on the Senate plan, but faced a revolt from the Tea Party wing of his party when he brought the plan back to the House.
There will ultimately be a full year extension of the tax break. However, all of the issues that Republicans are insisting be attached as conditions to the middle class payroll tax cut cannot be negotiated in such a limited time frame.
The time for Boehner to bring up his concerns was BEFORE the Senate acted.
It appears that Republicans are increasingly untrustworthy. They cause the other side to believe that there is a deal, then decide to pull the carpet from under them in order to extract more concessions. Democrats should simply refuse to let them get away with such tactics and demand that Republicans go forward with the deal that was already agreed to.
And if that doesn't work, Democrats should let Republicans take the heat from a temporary increase in payroll taxes, if that is what they want to cause. The public isn't going to be impressed with them going back on a deal in order to extract more concessions.
This who fiasco is an example of why there should have been clean votes on these issues in the first place. Either you are for raising taxes on the middle class during the middle of a recession, or you are not. Either you are for allowing unemployment benefits to expire during a period of severe high unemployment, or you are not. Republicans are the ones that are trying to attach extraneous issues to what should be clean votes, which makes the negotiations much more difficult.
If House Republicans really are so concerned about the effects of a two-month extension, then they should be willing to accept a clean vote on payroll tax cuts that isn't so difficult to negotiate.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"The story I am hearing "
I'm just passing on DNC talking points.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe two-month payroll tax holiday was a Republican plan, first introduced in 2009.
Obviously, there are differences between the 2009 legislation and the 2011 legislation.
But, I think the difference that grabs attention is the fact that in 2009 it was offered because the Democrats did not support it. And now that the Democrats support it, this idea is unacceptable.
NRO readers will see the considerable nuance between the plans. My comment references the conclusion I believe many average voters will reach.
External Link
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhere's Welker to make the claim that only Republicans play politics with the economy?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePolitics aside, I don't understand how anyone can say they can not implement an extension of an existing policy.
I know for my business, I do nothing if it is extended and make a change if the policy changes.
Politically speaking, there is so much other crap in these bills that there is a healthy scoop of disingenuousness on all sides. The real issues are this pipeline and the GOP fetish with paying for cuts now.
Hey GOP, I'm running a business and if someone (the Chinese) were offering to LEND ME MONEY AT 2% so i can invest in my future, I would in a second.
What the wha?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseP